Estimated time: how the US and Israel lost the "small sky" to Iran

The war in the Middle East has revealed the phenomenon of "price asymmetry", when the technological gap between the parties to the conflict suddenly turns into an economic trap for the seemingly stronger side. This observation was shared with Izvestia by experts. Iran has demonstrated in practice that in certain cases budget drones can be more effective than the latest generation fighter jets. And the technological capabilities to block the Strait of Hormuz using the same unmanned systems have already become a factor that pushed the United States to negotiate a truce.

The price asymmetry of the conflict

The classic superiority of the United States in the air has ceased to be the key to success in major military campaigns, as demonstrated by the conflict in Iran, experts interviewed by Izvestia said. Tehran has proven that in certain cases, a swarm of budget drones or targeted ballistic missile strikes against poorly protected targets can be more effective than the latest generation of fighter jets. Iran has effectively eliminated the concept of a "safe rear" by attacking targets hundreds or even thousands of kilometers from its territory, experts stressed. Dmitry Kornev also pointed to the phenomenon of "price asymmetry", when the technological gap turned into an economic trap.

— An anti-aircraft missile worth about $ 3 million is spent on intercepting a kamikaze drone for $ 20-50 thousand. Iran is able to assemble thousands of such devices per month, even from civilian components, while the production of complex anti-missiles in the United States is limited to hundreds per year. Sooner or later, the Americans' ammunition will be exhausted faster than Iran's drones will run out," he explained to Izvestia.

During the month and a half of the war in the Middle East, the Pentagon spent tens of billions of dollars in ammunition. But a significant part of these funds — at least as far as air defense systems are concerned — is spent on "junk" purposes. As a result, at some point the United States may have a shortage of high-precision interceptors and they will not be able to protect their Middle Eastern allies.

Control in the sky

Experts believe that this confrontation shows a kind of separation of spheres of influence in the air. So the "big sky" remained with the United States and its allies: their reconnaissance and strike aircraft and heavy UAVs dominate at high altitudes. First of all, because the Iranian air defense system has been seriously weakened. But the "small sky" is actually controlled by Iran, Dmitry Kornev believes. There, the initiative is behind relatively inexpensive Shahed—type drones. The American side has not been able to completely stop this threat.

The Iranian strategy of countering aggression is based on three components, experts say. Firstly, it is the already mentioned price asymmetry. Secondly. "rocket cities". The bet is placed on deeply layered underground bases. In a mountainous landscape, such storage facilities sink hundreds of meters into granite and basalt, which makes them virtually invulnerable even to tactical nuclear weapons, military expert Yuri Lyamin noted in a conversation with Izvestia.

The third is the tactic of gradual constant pressure on the air defense forces of the region. In the early days of the operation, Iran launched a massive strike against military targets, including radars and key air defense sites. Then the intensity decreased, but the blows continue methodically. As a result, when an opponent's stocks of expensive interceptor missiles are depleted, the effectiveness of hitting targets increases even with fewer launches, the expert explained.

— As for a possible change in US tactics, they are in a difficult position. An attempt to strengthen the "hunt" for mobile launchers with the help of manned aircraft will inevitably lead to an increase in losses among pilots. Iranian air defenses actively use passive optoelectronic systems and thermal imagers, working "from ambush" with the radars turned off. To find the target, the aircraft will have to descend, entering the effective destruction zone of these complexes. Washington is not psychologically prepared for such losses," he said.

But the United States is unlikely to reduce its presence in the region. On the contrary, we should expect a build-up of the group to launch more intensive airstrikes not only against the military, but also against Iran's industrial facilities, experts believe.

If the conflict returns to its active phase, we will see even greater intensity. The main question remains Iran's ability to increase the production of weapons under pressure and the ability of the United States to find an economically viable response to the "cheap" threat from the air, Dmitry Kornev summed up.

— The situation in strategically important zones, such as the Strait of Hormuz, clearly demonstrates the effectiveness of new methods of countering aggression. UAVs are becoming a formidable weapon against tankers and civilian vessels, surpassing the classic anti-ship missiles in terms of price—performance ratio," orientalist Kirill Semenov emphasized.

Moreover, we see the evolution of the mine-blasting business, Kirill Semenov believes. Submarines or special vessels are no longer needed to block the strait. Small remotely controlled vehicles are capable of setting up minefields unnoticed by radars. At the same time, one should not discount the classic anti-ship complexes that Iran and other players in the region retain as a "trump card" in case of direct entry of enemy forces into the Persian Gulf.

The Venezuelan scenario did not work

The current escalation between Iran, Israel, and the United States is fundamentally different from the events of June 2025. Andrey Chuprygin, Head of the Middle East Section at the Higher School of Economics, explained that if a year ago Washington's goal was to curb the nuclear program, now the administration of Donald Trump has relied on Iran's political transformation. The announced support for internal protests and calls for the seizure of administrative buildings turned foreign political pressure into an attempt to inspire a revolution.

— Iran is not Venezuela. Obviously, the White House was counting on a repeat of the "Venezuelan scenario", inspired by past successes. However, underestimation of the stability of the Iranian state system led to the fact that the conflict dragged on, he believes.

The second critical difference was the direct involvement of Arab States in the confrontation. If earlier the conflict could be localized in the USA—Israel—Iran triangle, today we see a war on a regional scale, Andrey Chuprygin emphasized.

— The current crisis is not a new conflict, but the transition of the old confrontation into a protracted and more dangerous phase. The inclusion of the Arab factor creates an intractable knot of contradictions that does not allow the parties to quickly return to de—escalation, as it was in 2025," he said.

The actual possibility of blocking the Strait of Hormuz has radically changed the balance of power in the region. By creating a direct threat to global energy security and the economic interests of its neighbors, Iran has forced its opponents to engage in dialogue. Thus, it was the "oil lever" and pressure on regional players, rather than a direct military conflict with Israel, that became the foundation that allowed Iran to balance its positions and achieve agreement on the terms of the truce, the experts summed up.